Physical layer security game: How to date a girl with her boyfriend on the same table

Abstract

Abstract-Physical layer security is an emerging security technology that achieves perfect secrecy data transmission between the intended network nodes, while the eavesdropping malicious nodes obtain zero information. The so-called secrecy capacity can be improved using friendly jammers that introduce extra interference to the eavesdropping malicious nodes while the interference to the intended destination is limited. In this paper, we investigate the interaction between the source that transmits the desired data and friendly jammers who assist the source by "disguising" the eavesdropper. In order to obtain a distributed solution, we introduce a game theoretic approach. The game is defined in such a way that the source pays the friendly jammers to interfere the eavesdropper, therefore increasing its secrecy capacit; and the friendly jammers charge the source with a certain price for the jamming. There is a tradeoff for the price: If the price is too low, the profit of the jammers is low; and if the price is too high, the source would not buy the "service" (jamming power) or would buy it from other jammers. To analyze the game outcome, we define and investigate a Stackelburg game and construct a distributed algorithm. Our analysis and simulation results show the effectiveness of friendly jamming and the tradeoff for setting the price. The fancy title comes from the fact that it is similar to a scenario where the main character, namely the "source" tries to send a dating message to a lady (the intended destination), whose poor boyfriend plays the role of the eavesdropper that may hear the message. Friends of the source, the so called "friendly jammers," try to distract the boyfriend, so that the dating message can be secretly transmitted. The game is defined in order to derive what is the optimal price that the friends can charge for this "friendly" action.

Improving secrecy rate via spectrum leasing for cooperative secondary users

“…The secondary transmitter, which competes with each other to gain the spectrum access opportunities, decides only its own transmitted power to maximizing its utility under the pre-decided α . Therefore, it can be analyzed using the Stackelberg game [11] with the primary transmitter and the selected secondary transmitter as the leader and the follower respectively.…”

Based on virtual beamforming cooperative jamming with Stackelberg game for physical layer security in the heterogeneous wireless network

“…However, the wireless collaboration nodes in the heterogeneous wireless network are selfish and need an incentive mechanism to ensure their participation in collaboration. A game-based cooperative scheme can motivate the selfish relay nodes to participate in the cooperative [17][18][19][20]. Han and Zhang [17,18] respectively analyze the system game performance of two cooperative interference nodes and the game performance of multi-user shared single cooperative interference node system.…”

“…A game-based cooperative scheme can motivate the selfish relay nodes to participate in the cooperative [17][18][19][20]. Han and Zhang [17,18] respectively analyze the system game performance of two cooperative interference nodes and the game performance of multi-user shared single cooperative interference node system. In view of the high requirement of communication quality among legitimate communication users and the limited energy of cooperative nodes, multiple collaboration nodes are required to interfere with the service.…”

An Information Secrecy Game in Cognitive Radio Networks

“…Information theory has been applied to study cognitive radio networks, for example, see [20] and references therein. Our work extends [9] to the cognitive radio network scenario where secondary users serve as the helper; however, different from [9] in which the helper simply transmits interfering coded signals bearing no useful information and [21] in which the helper sends out white noise sequences, in our work, secondary users do transmit meaningful messages for their receivers to decode. This constitutes an interference channel similar to [15] to some extent, but the roles of primary users and secondary users are asymmetric.…”

“…The results are summarized in Theorem 2. For conciseness, we define the following terms for common use: (20) Theorem 2: The rate pair takes one simple closedform expression from the candidate list, i.e., (21) to (43) in what follows, depending on the channel gains and power levels.…”